Originally Posted by scottwww
1) You have not established that the phrase "natural born Citizen" had not existed or had not been understood prior to the writing of the Constitution. You have not established there was no translation of the word "indigenes" used among the founders. Your references to a time machine are rather trite.
2) SCOTUS didn't rule on natural born Citizen. They ruled on citizen.
Vattel is not out. You presented interesting information about a couple translations in use at the the time of question. It is certainly a piece of the puzzle. There are many more pieces to consider.
Though Vattel is not out, Law of Nations is one of the sources to consider, and a very significant one at that. Even if you reject the connection between "natural born Citizen" and Vattel, certainly you recognize (or maybe you don't) the significance his words had on influencing how nations regard citizenship of any kind, including native, natural, and naturalized.
You may want to exclude Vattel, but the founders did not. And his words in translation are regarded as authority in many American historical documents.
If you would rather not discuss Vattel any further, then don't. Vattel is not "out". If you have other authorities you can quote, then please do.
I established that "natural born citizen" never existed in VATTEL's work prior to 1797. I know where the phrase came from. And Vattel is out.
I reject Vattel's influence on citizenship, so did SCOTUS. That is why their ruling is significant. They rejected Vattel on the question of ALL citizenship.